ELECTRIC UTILITY REQUIREMENTS AFFECTING SOLAR POWER SATELLITE DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT K. R. Kubitz and R. H. Moss Pacific Gas and Electric Company - San Francisco, California 94106 The electric utility industry consists of several thousand generation, transmission and distribution entities. It is vertically integrated from the stage of primary fuel consumption to retail delivery, and expanding at both ends, with important consequences for the development of the Solar Power Satellite (SPS). The favorable basic economics of the electric industry were reflected by the fact that the price for residential electricity had dropped from 1900 to 1940 and remained steady into the 1960's. Traditional utility planning made estimates of demand based on stable historical trends, led planners to evaluate the reliability and economics of commercialized supply options, and select a resource plan whose costs were routinely passed on to financial planners for capital development from internal and external sources. Several major changes have occurred which must be reflected in planning for SPS development. First, demand growth has become much more erratic. Second, utilities must evaluate a much broader portfolio of potential options, including geothermal, solar space and water heating, cogeneration, wind, biomass and conservation as economic means of meeting customers needs. Third, there is an increasing capital constraint on resource plans because of the unwillingness, in an era of rising rates, by regulatory agencies to provide returns that permit raising of new capital with the ease of the past. Fourth, a shadow pricing system representing the divergence between market prices for alternatives and the perceived social costs of public policymakers has emerged. A principal example is the incremental oil import cost estimated by the Harvard Business School study Energy Future at $85/bbl. Fifth, there is increasing regionalization of energy decisions. The SPS concept must be evaluated on the basis of utility criteria for future resources, including least cost (minimize revenue requirements from customers), financial risk (capital intensity and lumpiness), reliability (technology and operation), resource diversity, oil displacement, and technology development. SPS system definition studies have indicated busbar costs of 5-6<t/kwhr at a production rate of 1 SPS/yr and 3-4<£ at 4 SPS/yr. One estimate has reached 2.6$/ kwhr in 1979 dollars based on an expected extended life for the geosynchronous environment. On the other hand, given the conservative assumption that mature SPS system costs are only $1,000 per Kw more capital intensive than coal or nuclear systems, the SPS is a major financial risk. It would be necessary to reduce risk through pooling, turnkey contracts, or other measures. For the three planning reliability criteria of: 1 day in 10 year Loss of Load Probability, 12% of monthly peak load, and two largest risks, a 5 Gigawatt (Gw) SPS in conjunction with another 1,000 Megawatt (Mw) unit could require 6,000 Mw of reserve capacity, which would predominate until monthly peak load reached 42 Gw. SPS would contribute to resource diversity and significant oil displacement. California siting requirements discuss need for proposed facilities, likelihood of compliance with applicable laws and regulations, safety and reliability, and whether there are alternatives to the proposed project which are economically, environmentally, and socially preferable. Need has several components including
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==